User talk:Inhumer/Archive 2

Screamo and Wiki Collective Knowledge
Hi, I noticed that you reverted the screamo page to remove my edits, for the very good reason that my contributions were unsourced (though you noted that you agreed with most of them). This is probably in keeping with Wikipedia policy on original research, so you were probably right to do that. With that said, I wondered if I could discuss the way musical knowledge, in particular, is transmitted. See, it seems to me that sources on contemporary music sub-genres are often sparse, and frequently wrong. You can see this in the debate about the so-called "New Wave of American Heavy Metal" -- there's a book about it, but it's a stupid and hastily written book -- so does this mean that the genre exists? Oftentimes, information on genres like screamo and thrashcore and crust punk is buried in old zines -- and not many people have an extensive library of this literature. My point is this: There's always an interpretive necessity in Wikipedia article creation. The sentence "Other than that, it is fairly hard to classify (particularly since the rule about screaming vocals is bent fairly often)" is unsourced. Is there something published, anywhere, indicating that the "rule about screaming vocals" in screamo is ever bent? It obviously is, listening to the records themselves reveals this, but has a journalist said this? So couldn't we see Wikipedia as a kind of repository of collective knowledge -- ideally, everything should be sourced, but if insights can be integrated into an article that the community affirms as true, doesn't that say something? Honestly, I think that the Wiki community as a whole is in a position to test information in a much more democratic and accurate way than Allmusic or whatever. In the case of the screamo article -- something needs to be done to address the disparity between the first "screamo" groups (Drives Like Jehu, Swing Kids, Orchid, whatever) and the later stuff like Thursday. Obviously they have some commonalities, but right now we just have endless and stupidly normative debates about what constitutes "true" screamo. Now, I'll bet that there's never really been a book or an article in the mainstream press addressing this -- the press is obsessed with current events and has little regard for history. Shouldn't this distinction be at least skeletally included in the article, to be verified and discussed and contested on the talk page? best, Andrew Aryder779 (talk) 15:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar. Yeah, I'd like to right more about the distinction between "real" screamo and the new stuff, but it's not like anybody in the mainstream press has really sat down and written about the distinction between Heroin-screamo and Thursday-screamo. I end up getting sources from reviews and band interviews, and they don't approach the subject in a systematic way. I'm still working on the article, though, so with luck it'll be adequate in a while. Aryder779 (talk) 23:50, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Contemporary power violence
Fair enough. I hadn't heard of those groups. Aryder779 (talk) 00:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Charles Bronson is an important band, and their lack of an article is a glaring omission. I'm working on an overhaul of the "metalcore" page now, since I've found a source, and it's in pretty dreadful shape as it is. Aryder779 (talk) 15:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tagging
Hello Inhumer. Just want to remind you that the speedy deletion tag db-band should only be added for band articles where there is no claim whatsoever of notability of the band. In particular, articles such as Tear of a doll or Heimat-Los are detailed enough that they should be sent to articles for deletion (where I believe they would likely be kept). Cheers��, Pascal.Tesson (talk) 03:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Born Loco, take two
Hello! Your Speedy Delete nomination for Born Loco was rejected, but the article has since been nominated for AfD consideration. Here is the discussion for its potential erasure: []. Feel free to weigh-in there. Cheers! Ecoleetage (talk) 02:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Emarosa
Hi, I wanted to ask you if you were the person that changed my editing of Emarosa being a rock/experimental band to a post-hardcore band. Visit their myspace page and they have long since changed their genre from post-hardcore to rock/experimental/r&b. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisisyourwayout (talk • contribs) 18:30, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

This is my argument. Their myspace is the only reliable source this band has. Who are you to categorize them to your liking when the band itself has the right to describe their own music, show respect. Thisisyourwayout (talk) 21:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)Thisisyourwayout

The best account I found on a forum, that, weirdly, Wikipedia has "blacklisted", so I can't give you the link: "Other related terms include the now commonly used/widely accepted co-opt for screamo, "Skramz" which was coined by Alex Bigman (ex. Seeing Means More, current Fight Fair) in 2004 and popularized on the internet forum CMHWAK (cross my heart with a knife)." Seems like it's mainly a forum term, and difficult to substantiate on Wikipedia. I looked for more evidence, but with no luck. Aryder779 (talk) 21:05, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

That is where you are wrong. Visit the record label's OFFICIAL AND ONLY website at RiseRecords.com. Emarosa is the featured artist and once you click "website", it automatically directs you to Emarosa's official myspace page...the only reliable source for Emarosa's history or anything regarding them for that matter. You cant even prove they were ever a post-hardcore band because they have since changed their genre category musically and literally as is described on their HEADLINE as rock/experimental/r&b. Please stop being ignorant. Thisisyourwayout (talk) 03:46, 24 July 2008 (UTC)Thisisyourwayout

Fair Enough, i know that myspace isnt a ruled out reliable source, but u still sound like a moron making that argument because u cant favor common sense over legal sources no matter how obvious things are. I wasnt stating Rock/Experimental as a whole, i mean it as 2 seperate genres hence the "/" since Emarosa cannot be described with one single rederic. You have also sourced "old" Emarosa facts and they still have the notion of them "recently" recording an EP (its been 1.5 years). The only thing that has been updated is the band lineup and the icon of the new album. The old band picture is still there. Lets compromise and settle with 'Experimental rock' for the sake of Emarosa. Does it sound good to you?Thisisyourwayout (talk) 07:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)Thisisyourwayout

Since you are the only other person who knows anything reliable about Emarosa's genre, I am updating you right now. Your source for post-hardcore is not totally updated and only the title of the album "Relativity" and Jonny Craig as lead vocalist was updated. Everything else (including the picture), has not been updated. I have found a reliable source which describes Emaorosa as "Rock" plain and simple. It was updated on July 11, 2008. Here is the link - http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:ajfrxzqjldte. Work with me here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisisyourwayout (talk • contribs) 01:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

An just so you know, It is an officially recognized metadata base done by professionals. It is widely trused and recognized for categorizing music artists and the page i have sourced above has no opinions/reviews and plain and simple list's the genre of the band. thisisyourwayout

Since my source is a famous metadata base done by professionals and recently updated, the only thing that you can source which is more trusted is the billboard site, they have no opinion on the genre. you lose budy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisisyourwayout (talk • contribs) 02:25, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

USE YOUR HEAD!!! WP:RS on the second paragraph states the website needs to match the the information, in this case the music...it doesnt whatsoever...the album shows 2 sources...riserecords.com and myspace.com/emarosa....my source co-exists with riserecords.com and myspace.com/emarosa with the Rock genre...yours doesnt co-exist with either.

AfD nomination of The Subsystem
An article that you have been involved in editing, The Subsystem, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/The Subsystem. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --Seascic T/C 16:51, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

August 2008
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Toddst1 (talk) 16:43, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Charles Bronson
If you get the chance, you should vote at Articles for deletion/Charles Bronson (band) (2nd nomination) to keep the Charles Bronson (band) page. I didn't create the article, but I've added some sources to try to establish its notability. best, Aryder779 (talk) 17:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Jim Croce
Hi Ron, Since you mention on Jim Croce's talk page that you are "best friends with Jim's nephew and [are] quite close to his sister in law and mother in law," do you think you could get a picture of Jim from his relatives that could be included on his page? It would be important to save any documentation from them about the photo indicating the nature of the license they want to apply (e.g., "we willingly contribute this photo into the public domain"), if they're willing to donate one. If you send it to me, I could put it in. Thanks. SteveChervitzTrutane (talk) 06:12, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Delete tag removed from Watchout! Theres Ghosts
See Talk:Watchout! Theres Ghosts for details. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:19, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: The ghost inside (band)
Hello Inhumer, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of The ghost inside (band) - a page you tagged - because: '''SIgned to a label with an article and have toured with bands with articles, both credible assertion of notability sufficient for A7. PROD or take to AfD if required.'''If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Ged UK  21:20, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Jake Hager
Please do not revert the information as it is sourced and true. There is a discussion taking place on the talk page, so please make your comments there and don't remove the sourced information. Thanks. –Turian  ( talk )  17:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

The Arusha Accord (band)
I had proposed deletion already and it was deprodded, therefore you can't use CSD. Please nominate the article for deletion so the issue can be discussed. Regards Hekerui (talk) 20:50, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Murphys Law
I well understand why you did the revert. I told him already. But it's not altogether bad.

What I've done is put the removed copy at User:Citrullonj81/MLaw where perhaps he can lick into acceptable shape.

Wwwhatsup (talk) 12:27, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy declined, and the size of your talk page
Hi. User wishes you to know that he declined your speedy deletion nomination on 20 Bulls Each because, although unsourced, it gave an assertion of notability. The reason you are getting this message from me rather than from him is that he reported here that whenever he tried to open your talk page his computer froze. I think this is probably because your talk page is extremely large - over 630 kb - owing to all the back numbers of the WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter. Would you consider deleting or archiving some of them? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:06, 5 April 2010 (UTC)